Solana votes on a rewrite of its monetary policy, with balloting open since Sunday and closing Thursday around 15:30 UTC. Two proposals bundled as SGP-0003 would lift daily burns from roughly 650 tokens to as many as 9,000, while pulling the terminal inflation date forward by three years. Ballots are weighted by staked tokens. A third measure ratifies a Constitution that formalises the voting system itself.
Key Takeaways
- SIMD-0553 burns part of every transaction fee instead of paying it to operators.
- SIMD-0550 doubles the disinflation rate and moves the floor from 2032 to 2029.
- The network still issues roughly 60,000 tokens a day, far ahead of what burns.
SIMD-0553 Lifts Daily Burns From 650 Tokens to 9,000
The first measure rewrites the fee structure outright. The document filed by the network’s developers splits the 5,000 lamports charged per signature into two blocks: a flat inclusion fee of 2,500 lamports that goes entirely to the operator, and a resource fee priced on what the transaction actually consumes, burned in full.
The numbers are unambiguous. Solana votes here on moving daily burns from around 650 tokens to a band of 7,500 to 9,000, depending on how busy the network gets. In dollar terms that shifts the dial from tens of thousands a day into the hundreds of thousands.
The starting calibration matters as much as the structure. The proposal sets an initial resource fee rate of 0.5, applied to the cost units a transaction requests, which means the burn scales with what the scheduler is actually asked to do rather than with a flat count of signatures. That parameter is the dial the network can turn later without reopening the whole fee design.
The design corrects a long-standing imbalance. Someone submitting a compute-heavy transaction currently pays the same base rate as someone sending a plain transfer, regardless of the load each one places on the scheduler. Heavy transactions stop being subsidised by everyone else, which pushes cost onto the most intensive usage patterns.
The template is not unheard of elsewhere in the market. The burn mechanism deployed on BNB works on comparable logic, tying supply reduction to network usage rather than to a fixed schedule set in advance by the issuer.
SIMD-0550 Pulls the Inflation Floor Forward to 2029
The second measure leaves fees alone and targets the issuance calendar. The proposal doubles the annual disinflation rate from 15% to 30%. The terminal 1.5% floor would then arrive in 2029 rather than 2032, compressing the runway from roughly 5.7 years to about 2.8.
This is not a new fight on this network. An earlier attempt, SIMD-228, failed to reach quorum, and the text on the ballot this week revives a proposal already filed under a different number. What changed in the meantime is the governance tooling, which is now live and being used to run all three measures.
The reason the earlier attempt collapsed is worth keeping in view. Appetite for cutting nominal issuance was never the sticking point. What split the network was mechanism design, the question of how the reduction should be engineered, and that disagreement is precisely what kept SIMD-228 short of quorum rather than any rejection of the underlying goal.
Market conditions shape the timing as much as the tooling does. The token added 8% on Tuesday alone in the slipstream of the broader rally, after falling to $64 in late June on a 75% drawdown. A scarcity debate rarely gets a friendlier backdrop than the one it has right now.
Support is concentrated rather than broad. The preliminary phase cleared the 15% staked threshold, with Helius alone accounting for close to two thirds of the committed tokens, alongside Jupiter and Drift. A stake-weighted ballot mechanically hands the final say to the largest operators, which is the trade-off this governance model accepts by design.
Also on Cryptonomic:
- Bitcoin Breaks $80,000 in Its Best Week Since 2023
- Bitcoin Pauses at $77K Before the New Fed Chair Speaks
- XRP Token Jumps From $1.00 to $1.56 in Three Days
The 60,000 Tokens Issued Daily Are Not on the Ballot
The third item on the ballot is easy to overlook next to the supply measures, and it may end up mattering more. It ratifies a Solana Constitution and formalises the very voting system being used to settle all three questions this week. A network that codifies how it decides is setting the terms of every future fight over issuance, fees and protocol changes.
The figure the campaign around this vote leaves in the shade is the issuance side. The network mints roughly 60,000 tokens a day. Even at the top of the proposed band, burns would reach 9,000, which is under a seventh of what gets created over the same period.
Supply therefore keeps growing. The vote slows dilution without reversing it, which is a materially different proposition from a genuinely deflationary asset. The useful comparison sits with Ethereum and its own monetary policy, where flipping into net supply contraction depends directly on how much the network is used.
In the near term, operator revenue is the variable worth watching. A slice of the fees that used to land in their pockets gets destroyed instead, which trims their compensation directly. Solana votes on a trade-off between token scarcity and the economics of the people running the machines that keep the chain alive.
There is a second-order effect worth flagging for holders who stake through a validator. Any squeeze on operator margins eventually reaches the yield passed back down to delegators, so the same vote that tightens supply can also shave the return on holding the token through a staking position.
Timing is the other thing worth pricing. Solana votes on all of this while the token is riding a broad market rally, which flatters the dollar value of every burn projection being circulated. Run the same arithmetic at June levels and the headline figure shrinks by more than a third, without a single parameter of the proposal changing.
On a three to six month view the real question is activity. Because burns are indexed to resource consumption, they only scale if the network is genuinely used. A yes vote on Thursday creates the mechanism, it does not deliver the throughput that would make the mechanism matter.
Follow the story on Cryptonomic.
